The global retinoblastoma outcome study : a prospective, cluster-based analysis of 4064 patients from 149 countries

DATA SHARING : The study data will become available online once all analyses are complete.BACKGROUND : Retinoblastoma is the most common intraocular cancer worldwide. There is some evidence to suggest that major differences exist in treatment outcomes for children with retinoblastoma from different regions, but these differences have not been assessed on a global scale. We aimed to report 3-year outcomes for children with retinoblastoma globally and to investigate factors associated with survival. METHODS : We did a prospective cluster-based analysis of treatment-naive patients with retinoblastoma who were diagnosed between Jan 1, 2017, and Dec 31, 2017, then treated and followed up for 3 years. Patients were recruited from 260 specialised treatment centres worldwide. Data were obtained from participating centres on primary and additional treatments, duration of follow-up, metastasis, eye globe salvage, and survival outcome. We analysed time to death and time to enucleation with Cox regression models. FINDINGS : The cohort included 4064 children from 149 countries. The median age at diagnosis was 23·2 months (IQR 11·0–36·5). Extraocular tumour spread (cT4 of the cTNMH classification) at diagnosis was reported in five (0·8%) of 636 children from high-income countries, 55 (5·4%) of 1027 children from upper-middle-income countries, 342 (19·7%) of 1738 children from lower-middle-income countries, and 196 (42·9%) of 457 children from low-income countries. Enucleation surgery was available for all children and intravenous chemotherapy was available for 4014 (98·8%) of 4064 children. The 3-year survival rate was 99·5% (95% CI 98·8–100·0) for children from high-income countries, 91·2% (89·5–93·0) for children from upper-middle-income countries, 80·3% (78·3–82·3) for children from lower-middle-income countries, and 57·3% (52·1-63·0) for children from low-income countries. On analysis, independent factors for worse survival were residence in low-income countries compared to high-income countries (hazard ratio 16·67; 95% CI 4·76–50·00), cT4 advanced tumour compared to cT1 (8·98; 4·44–18·18), and older age at diagnosis in children up to 3 years (1·38 per year; 1·23–1·56). For children aged 3–7 years, the mortality risk decreased slightly (p=0·0104 for the change in slope). INTERPRETATION : This study, estimated to include approximately half of all new retinoblastoma cases worldwide in 2017, shows profound inequity in survival of children depending on the national income level of their country of residence. In high-income countries, death from retinoblastoma is rare, whereas in low-income countries estimated 3-year survival is just over 50%. Although essential treatments are available in nearly all countries, early diagnosis and treatment in low-income countries are key to improving survival outcomes.The Queen Elizabeth Diamond Jubilee Trust and the Wellcome Trust.https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/homeam2023Paediatrics and Child Healt

Informe de verificación y asesoría en las condiciones del sistema de habilitación de prestadores de servicios de salud E.S.E. hospital San Francisco de Asís.

Este trabajo se desarrolla como modalidad de grado, para optar al título de Especialistas en Gerencia de la Calidad y Auditoría en Salud. Para ello se realizó el Diplomado de Verificadores de las Condiciones de Habilitación de los Prestadores de Servicios de Salud y se desarrolló la práctica en la E.S.E. Hospital San Francisco de Asís del municipio de San Francisco (Antioquia), donde se verificaron los estándares de habilitación en varios servicios, utilizando como guía las normas vigentes para la materia; entre ellas la principal que es la Resolución 2003 de 2014 que regula específicamente la materia. Se presenta el informe de práctica con lo cual se brinda asesoría a la institución para que dichos resultados y recomendaciones sean incluidos en el Plan de Mejoramiento de la institución. Siendo éste un ejercicio académico de cómo sería una visita de verificación de condiciones de Habilitación para las IPS, no solo desde el punto de vista del ente territorial, sino como verificadores internos de cada institución y poder así cumplir con la norma y evitar algún tipo de no conformidad en las visitas de verificación de las condiciones de habilitación. Se llevó a cabo mediante una visita programada en el mes de septiembre de 2018, donde se obtuvieron las observaciones que fueron la base para la realización de este trabajo.Agradecimientos. -- Resumen. -- Reseña institucional. -- Introducción. -- Justificación. -- Antecedentes normativos. -- Objetivos. -- Productos. -- Alcance. -- Actividades y metodología. -- Diagnóstico. -- Limitaciones y fortalezas. -- Resultados. -- Conclusiones y recomendaciones. -- Anexos. [email protected]@[email protected]@[email protected]@[email protected]@campusucc.edu.c

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

The Global Retinoblastoma Outcome Study: a prospective, cluster-based analysis of 4064 patients from 149 countries

Background Retinoblastoma is the most common intraocular cancer worldwide. There is some evidence to suggest that major differences exist in treatment outcomes for children with retinoblastoma from different regions, but these differences have not been assessed on a global scale. We aimed to report 3-year outcomes for children with retinoblastoma globally and to investigate factors associated with survival. Methods We did a prospective cluster-based analysis of treatment-naive patients with retinoblastoma who were diagnosed between Jan 1,2017, and Dec 31,2017, then treated and followed up for 3 years. Patients were recruited from 260 specialised treatment centres worldwide. Data were obtained from participating centres on primary and additional treatments, duration of follow-up, metastasis, eye globe salvage, and survival outcome. We analysed time to death and time to enucleation with Cox regression models. Findings The cohort included 4064 children from 149 countries. The median age at diagnosis was 23.2 months (IQR 11.0-36.5). Extraocular tumour spread (cT4 of the cTNMH classification) at diagnosis was reported in five (0.8%) of 636 children from high-income countries, 55 (5.4%) of 1027 children from upper-middle-income countries, 342 (19. 7%) of 1738 children from lower-middle-income countries, and 196 (42.9%) of 457 children from low-income countries. Enudeation surgery was available for all children and intravenous chemotherapy was available for 4014 (98.8%) of 4064 children. The 3-year survival rate was 99.5% (95% CI 98.8-100.0) for children from high-income countries, 91.2% (89.5-93.0) for children from upper-middle-income countries, 80.3% (78.3-82.3) for children from lower-middle-income countries, and 57.3% (524-63-0) for children from low-income countries. On analysis, independent factors for worse survival were residence in low-income countries compared to high-income countries (hazard ratio 16.67; 95% CI 4.76-50.00), cT4 advanced tumour compared to cT1 (8.98; 4.44-18.18), and older age at diagnosis in children up to 3 years (1.38 per year; 1.23-1.56). For children aged 3-7 years, the mortality risk decreased slightly (p=0.0104 for the change in slope). Interpretation This study, estimated to include approximately half of all new retinoblastoma cases worldwide in 2017, shows profound inequity in survival of children depending on the national income level of their country of residence. In high-income countries, death from retinoblastoma is rare, whereas in low-income countries estimated 3-year survival is just over 50%. Although essential treatments are available in nearly all countries, early diagnosis and treatment in low-income countries are key to improving survival outcomes. Copyright (C) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.Y